1) No, I think this article is indicative of that fact league-wide sentiment has changed. Going in to the season, and even to that point, Bortles was still regarded as one of the worst.

 

2) I still think he is one of the worst, and I don't think his ceiling is higher than someone like Tannehil. Based on his poor accuracy, poor decision making, and major inconsistencies. I think his TD numbers have been inflated this year.

 

3) Yes, despite marginal improvement I still don't think he is very good since then. He completed like 40% of his passes against Buffalo, still with horrible INTs and that gw TD was a horribly thrown ball that Hurns made a tremendous play on. The TD numbers make it look better than it really is.

 

4) Yes, he has made some significant strides individually but it has't done anything for the team. He still hasn't won a road game and the team is still losing to other bottom feeders. The only wins were against a team in turmoil (who had since fired their coach) and a team with half of its starting offense and key defender injured. 

 

1. "The league-wide sentiment changed from that statement." ...How? Are you saying that the league wide sentiment is no longer that Bortles is one of the worst QBs in the league? Be clear.

 

2. "One of the worst" is vague. What is your criteria, in terms of ranking, of "one of the worst"? Bottom 2? Bottom 5?

 

3. Okay, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

4. So now he has mad significant strides from last season? You literally said his improvements haven't been significant at all. Glad to see you coming around on this.

---

I'd say something like 63% 7.0 YPA 1.8:1 TD:INT ratio around 225 YPG is close to league average.

 

1. I said it terms of rankings. There are 32 starting QBs in the NFL, so where would one have to rank to be considered an "average starting QB". Math shouldn't be this hard.

 

2. How many quarterbacks do you think hit all of those benchmarks?

---

1. "The league-wide sentiment changed from that statement." ...How? Are you saying that the league wide sentiment is no longer that Bortles is one of the worst QBs in the league? Be clear.

 

2. "One of the worst" is vague. What is your criteria, in terms of ranking, of "one of the worst"? Bottom 2? Bottom 5?

 

3. Okay, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

4. So now he has mad significant strides from last season? You literally said his improvements haven't been significant at all. Glad to see you coming around on this.

 

1) How has it changed? I don't know, based on his play? How can I determine what information people are using to formulate their beliefs? I stated my opinion clear enough in the first word, no I don't think the league as a whole still thinks he's the worst QB in the league.

 

2) That varies based on who the starting QBs are in the league at the moment. When guys like Vick, Manuel, Smith, hasselbeck and Weeden have to start games, then his corresponding placement changes. Not giving a precise ranking based on those considerations does take anything away from my point, he is still amongst the worst.

 

4) Missing the context of the very original post, which was that he hasn't made any strides significant enough to win games. Which he still hasn't.

---

I get the feeling that baconator doesn't realize that the QBR system is designed to rate QBs against average play.

 

What is average, ill-informed folks like baconator may ask?

 

50

 

50 = average QB play based on the QBR system

 

So, for baconator to be correct about Bortles being "below average," his QBR would have to be significantly below 50.

 

Bortles QBR is 61.4.

 

I think the evidence gives us a pretty good idea of who's off base here.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

1. I said it terms of rankings. There are 32 starting QBs in the NFL, so where would one have to rank to be considered an "average starting QB". Math shouldn't be this hard.

 

2. How many quarterbacks do you think hit all of those benchmarks?

 

1) You're trying to force me to adopt a critieria that was not my own. It was used in the article.

 

2) There are 20 QBs with better than 63%, 24 over 7 YPA, about half meet the TD:INT threshold and it seems the yardage average might be higher than my estimate.

---

I get the feeling that baconator doesn't realize that the QBR system is designed to rate QBs against average play.

 

What is average, ill-informed folks like baconator may ask?

 

50

 

50 = average QB play based on the QBR system

 

So, for baconator to be correct about Bortles being "below average," his QBR would have to be significantly below 50.

 

Bortles QBR is 61.4.

 

I think the evidence gives us a pretty good idea of who's off base here.

 

QBR doesn't account for pure passing though, running statistics are also factored in. Seems like the methodology behind that stat is off base. Just google 'QBR is worthless' and I'm sure many examples will appear where it fails.

---

1) How has it changed? I don't know, based on his play? How can I determine what information people are using to formulate their beliefs? I stated my opinion clear enough in the first word, no I don't think the league as a whole still thinks he's the worst QB in the league.

 

2) That varies based on who the starting QBs are in the league at the moment. When guys like Vick, Manuel, Smith, hasselbeck and Weeden have to start games, then his corresponding placement changes. Not giving a precise ranking based on those considerations does take anything away from my point, he is still amongst the worst.

 

4) Missing the context of the very original post, which was that he hasn't made any strides significant enough to win games. Which he still hasn't.

 

1. So the league as a whole doesn't consider him one of the worst QBs in the league? But you still do?

 

2. Oh, come on. Don't be a coward about this. You keep saying he is one of the worst, so I'm curious as to how low he is in terms of starting QBs (in your opinion). Do you consider him a top 25 QB?.

 

4. Don't blame your inability to word that correctly in your original post on me. If you wrote it wrong originally, just say so. I'm not a mind reader.

---

1) You're trying to force me to adopt a critieria that was not my own. It was used in the article.

 

2) There are 20 QBs with better than 63%, 24 over 7 YPA, about half meet the TD:INT threshold and it seems the yardage average might be higher than my estimate.

 

1. No I'm not. You repeatedly refer to Bortles as a below average starting QB. I'm trying to figure out where an "average QB" would fall in terms of ranking 32 starting QBs.

 

2. So now you're changing your criteria? How many QBs fit all the criteria you originally stated?

---

1. So the league as a whole doesn't consider him one of the worst QBs in the league? But you still do?

 

2. Oh, come on. Don't be a coward about this. You keep saying he is one of the worst, so I'm curious as to how low he is in terms of starting QBs (in your opinion). Do you consider him a top 25 QB?.

 

4. Don't blame your inability to word that correctly in your original post on me. If you wrote it wrong originally, just say so. I'm not a mind reader.

 

1) I can't say really, I can't speak for anyone else. I'd wager you'd find split results depending who you ask. Even the supporter in this article hedges his bets considerably.

 

2) Hard to think of all the starting QBs now, but I will say he isn't sniffing the top 20.

 

4) Ok, one more time for you. No, the strides he has made have not been significant in the sense that its helping the team win games. Going from historically bad to below average is a significant improvement, but not in the big scheme of things because a below average player is not winning you games.

---

1. No I'm not. You repeatedly refer to Bortles as a below average starting QB. I'm trying to figure out where an "average QB" would fall in terms of ranking 32 starting QBs.

 

2. So now you're changing your criteria? How many QBs fit all the criteria you originally stated?

 

1) I was trying to interpret the article, read my first post.

 

2) No, my criteria has always been my own. I don't know what you mean by all the criteria? But its clear my estimates of 'league average' were too conservative given how many QBs exceed it. 

---

1) I was trying to interpret the article, read my first post.

 

2) No, my criteria has always been my own. I don't know what you mean by all the criteria? But its clear my estimates of 'league average' were too conservative given how many QBs exceed it. 

 

Think back to the last several years of Jags football with Gabbert and Henne at QB. I know it's depressing, but still, look back at it.

 

Has our QB play improved over the Gabbert/Henne era with Bortles? Or has it just not gotten any better with Bortles?

---

I survived the Gus Bradley Error.

1) I was trying to interpret the article, read my first post.

 

2) No, my criteria has always been my own. I don't know what you mean by all the criteria? But its clear my estimates of 'league average' were too conservative given how many QBs exceed it. 

 

1. I've looked at your post history and there are repeated instances (including outside of this thread and before this article) of you referring to Bortles as below average. I'm trying to figure out where an "average" QB would land in terms of rankings.

 

2. You listed 4 benchmarks that a QB would need to be considered an average QB. Less than 10 QBs hit all 4 of your benchmarks.

---

I feel like I am taking a test with all of the:

 

1) ........

 

2) ........

---

QBR doesn't account for pure passing though, running statistics are also factored in. Seems like the methodology behind that stat is off base. Just google 'QBR is worthless' and I'm sure many examples will appear where it fails.

 

You're right, you aren't the only nutjob on the internet.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Last week Rodgers (14-22 77 yds) had a better QBR rating than Brady (26-38 356 yds 4 TDs)

 

Rodgers 64.6 QBR

 

Brady 60.7 QBR

 

Seen these stats a few days ago and they should tell you everything you need to know about ESPN's QBR.....

---

1) I was trying to interpret the article, read my first post.

 

2) No, my criteria has always been my own. I don't know what you mean by all the criteria? But its clear my estimates of 'league average' were too conservative given how many QBs exceed it.

1) Does not matter

2) Not a person on this, or any other message board on the planet would deny your criteria is YOUR own. Nobody of sane mind would ever admit to adapting it.

---

In addition to his two wins this year, Bortles played well enough to beat Indy. That loss wasn't his fault; it was Myers' fault.  He threw four TDs and only one INT against the Bucs....that should have been good enough for the win. It was the defense that caved in on that one.

 

Realize too, that his receivers are as young and inexperienced as he is. I still don't think they're completely on the same page yet.

---

This is what Revis, the best CB in the game, said about Bortles:

 

"He seems more poised and more relaxed in the pocket," Revis said. "I will tell you one thing: his arm, he probably has got one of the strongest arms in the league. He scrambles a lot and he can throw, even scrambling. You can tell he can make all the throws."

 

Yes, and now it's just a matter of getting more experience, getting more comfortable with the game, and let the game slow down just a bit more.

---

I love Blake and think he's a stud.


Carr is playing lights out right now. 8 TDs and no picks in his last 3 games? Not a fan of Teddy or Manziel.


Blake has the highest ceiling of all the guys though, IMO. The main things you look for in elite QBs are their play against the blitz, red zone TDs and how they play at the end of halves and games. Blake is doing much better in 2 of the 3. He needs to improve his red zone decisions but that will come.


We got a good one boys.

---

Thunderjag or Thundercat is the only one I can really remember being steadfast in his dislike of Blake. It's almost TMD-esque. Stick to your guns no matter what happens. 

 

 

...and of course Baconator, or are you not counting Titans fans?

---

'02